The Public Pulse, August 19

Every faith has its own radicals

Let us remember that in America, we have freedom of religion. Would anyone object if someone wanted to build a Christian house of worship near the Oklahoma City federal building? After all, Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh was a Roman Catholic.

If we lump all Muslims in the same category as the World Trade Center terrorists, should we not lump all Christians in the same category as McVeigh?

As a pastor, I am appalled at the attitudes of my fellow Christians who would cast doubt on an entire religion because of a radical few.

All of our faiths have radical elements. I doubt we want to be labeled by the actions of a radical few, so let us remember that unless we are without sin, we should not be casting stones at others.

The Rev. Charlene Wozny, Omaha

Support fingerprint program

Why would anyone oppose a federal program that uses fingerprints to flag prison inmates wanted by immigration authorities?

Well, of course, there’s the American Civil Liberties Union, which is generally on the wrong side of any issue it embraces.

Another group would be the Nebraska Appleseed Center for Law in the Public Interest, apparently an organization with deep pockets that has never met an illegal alien it doesn’t want to defend in court or a welfare program it doesn’t wish to see expanded.

I hope this fingerprint program is expanded and these inmates are deported promptly and efficiently.

Vic Massara, Omaha

Revising gun, citizenship laws

Bob Bradshaw’s Aug. 13 letter brings up the question of GOP hypocrisy regarding an effort to amend the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The GOP accepts the fact that times have changed and our Founding Fathers could not have fathomed the number of illegal immigrants coming into our country to have children who become U.S. citizens.

At the same time, the GOP defends the Second Amendment to the extreme. Did our Founding Fathers really anticipate automatic assault weapons when the Second Amendment was adopted?

So, why not also modernize the Second Amendment? How is that any different than modernizing the 14th Amendment?

As a U.S. citizen, I have no problem with hunting rifles, although I am not a hunter. I wouldn’t own a handgun to protect my home. The facts show handguns can be turned on the homeowner.

I do see the many types of assault weapons available under the Second Amendment as a threat. I would like the GOP to explain why we should revisit the 14th Amendment and not revisit the Second Amendment.

Donna Hevelone, Blair, Neb.

Fun at Hummel Park continues

Kudos to the City of Omaha, the Nebraska Environmental Trust and the Papio-Missouri River Natural Resources District for their vision and commitment to improve conditions at Hummel Park with the renovation and new buildings for the day camp.

The park is an absolutely incredible piece of land snuggled up to our city, and it deserves some love and care.

I hope I speak for a generation of Omahans who have enjoyed fun-filled summer weeks at Hummel Day Camp in saying thanks for keeping the camp going for generations to come. The added opportunity for even more visitors to rent the building space to enjoy the park should be snapped up immediately.

Wendy Wiseman Gustafson, Omaha

Facing tough economic times

Omaha may be in worse financial shape than since the Great Depression. I commend Mayor Jim Suttle for his realistic approach to creating a working budget aimed at the city’s current and long-term financial health.

However, some Omahans are not ready, nor mature enough, to hear a truthful accounting of our financial state, with realistic approaches to fixing the problems — so they figuratively shoot the messenger.

I have yet to read any constructive suggestions from anyone. Removal of Mayor Suttle would not solve our financial issues.

Tea Party people rail, “No more taxes” — a cute slogan with no substance. Where do those opposed to the mayor’s budget proposals think the money will come from?

As my first-year economics instructor told our class: Beware the politician who says he will not raise or cut taxes. What he is really saying is: Which services are you willing to cut back on or give up?

Dennis Wagner, Omaha

Fathers need choice on abortion

Debra Bentley Daly’s Aug. 10 letter says she is pro-choice and that all women and men should have a right to be pro-choice.

That a pro-choicer would include men in the right to choose is odd. Often, men have no choice in the life or death of their unborn children, even when married to the mother.Even those men who are willing and able to raise their children can be denied any voice in the decision to abort.

It isn’t just mothers who suffer after an abortion. Recently, long overdue studies have revealed that a significant portion of fathers suffer from the affects of abortion.

Men internalize their suffering, so it often is not acknowledged, but it is real. After losing a child to abortion, some men experience post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, anger and relationship problems, and other emotional and psychological disturbances.

There needs to be more study and exposure about abortion’s damage to the father. Hopefully, more fathers will be free to choose life and love for their babies.

Tom Heenan, Omaha

Have to draw line somewhere

The problem with the controversy over California’s same-sex marriage ban is that God’s intent has been left out of the debate. Men and women can rationalize their own code of ethics for a time, but eventually more problems arise.

If same-sex marriage were validated, where would society draw the line? Do we neglect Judeo-Christian reasoning in cases of pedophilia, incest, polygamy or bestiality?

Setting aside preconceived beliefs of right and wrong in those cases, would we also determine that if consensual, and no harm done to anyone, they also should be allowed?

Excluding God and the Bible, where is the line drawn before endangering the collapse of every other moral code?

Val Black, Shenandoah, Iowa

« Columnists

Share